Capcom-Unity has details on the upcoming Windows edition of Super Street Fighter IV Arcade Edition, explaining what to expect, since though Street Fighter IV was released for PCs, Super Street Fighter IV was not (thanks joao). They also offer system requirements and outline how DRM in the game will work, saying it will require both a Games for Windows LIVE account as well as a persistent internet connection, since "SFIV unfortunately was plagued by pirates and hackers that messed up leaderboards." Here's word on how this is supposed to work:

Now, on the security side of things, SFIV unfortunately was plagued by pirates and hackers that messed up leaderboards. To hopefully remedy that, SSFIV:AE will be making use of what is called SSA technology (similar to what we used in Dead Rising 2). Like Xbox Live, players will sign in when they launch the game. You must have a Games for Windows Live account (which is free) in order to get full access to the title. If you already have an Xbox Live silver or gold account, those would work too and your achievements would be added/displayed in your usual gamescore.

Inevitably the question is: if you happen to temporarily lose your connection in the middle of your session (letís say youíre working on combos in the training room or working on challenges), no problem. Youíll be able to keep doing what youíre doing until you come to a logical break point, like exiting to a menu, at which point youíll be asked to sign back in. Assuming your PC is back online, everything will continue as it should, just like on Xbox 360.

If you arenít signed in to an online GFWL profile, the offline mode has limited functionality. Obviously thereís no online play, access to replay channels or other online-centric features (and this is the part that keeps the online play secure from hackers or pirates). Additionally, you wonít be able to save any progress in challenges or settings, wonít have access to any DLC youíve purchased and all local play will be restricted to 15 of the 39 characters.

To answer a few other questions before they get asked:

There are no installation limits. The game is tied to the user account with the SSA mechanism. You can install it a zillion times and as long as youíre logged in on the associated account, youíre good to go.

Yes there is DLC supported. All of the costume packs from the console versions, going back to the original SFIV, will be made available via Games for Windows Live Marketplace. There is a caveat though: Steam users will not be using GFWL Marketplace to obtain DLC. Weíll provide more details on that wrinkle at a later date.

The GFWL services and functionality is the same regardless of whether you buy a physical disc or download via a digital delivery service. There is no other form of DRM on retail copies or most digital outlets. Steam and Impulse will be enabled to make use of their respective security solutions in addition to SSA.

Dev wrote on May 26, 2011, 00:40:Maybe use steam next time instead of the *barf* GfWL. It limits you to 1 signin at a time, unlimited installs. It has ability to not unlock the game until a particular release day/time, etc.

While Steam VS GFWL isn't really the issue here, it does amaze me how people support Steam DRM. The biggest issues is that Steam requires periodical sign-ins, even in "offline" mode. Whereas GFWL never requires you to be online, and even allows you to create and play on offline accounts that require no user data or tracking.

This won't do fuck to fix piracy or hacked leaderboards, and I'm sure they know that. It's just retardery to appease idiot shareholders who don't know an xbox controller from a SATA controller.

That said, at least they realize that losing connection in the middle of play and then losing everything you'd been working out is the kind of stupidity that only Ubisoft should be able to come up with, so they're not going that far.

Still, it's always-on DRM, and I hope enough people will refrain from buying it that it'll quickly go the way of the dodo again.

Idiot publishers. GfSL AND always-on DRM. How about you include a robot that rapes your family as soon as you open the box? You know, go for the trifecta of horseshit.

NoCD says hi! All DRM is too draconian. None solve piracy and all inconvenience the paying customer. Greed causes many businesses and people to make decisions that that are generally illogical, hurt others and ultimately hurt themselves. Sony doesn't talk to the young smart person who figured out something about their security, they attack him first (now they pay the price for making the first attack). Back in the day on the Amiga they would format the discs weird to make them hard to copy. This would mess with people's drives or the game wouldn't work at all if the drive wasn't in perfect alignment. Meanwhile people who downloaded a cracked version that might also run off of your hard drive had no problems and could start up the game faster. Companies should have learned by now assuming they can think straight...

The only horror story here is Capcom's own description of the DRM! Pirates will still be able to play their cracked version offline and the paying customers won't be able to. And if you loose your connection you have to leave your game running until you can connect again or loose your progress.

Ugh. I've been praising Capcom for their pc gaming support lately and then they had to go and do something stupid. I just hope they don't go all Ubisoft on me and do this with all their games from now on. I don't care about SSFIV AE since I already own SF4 and SSFIV AE just seems like $40(or however much it costs) dlc. But if they start doing this with the Resident Evils then there will be hell to pay.

entr0py wrote on May 25, 2011, 22:22:While this technology did nothing to prevent piracy with Dead Rising 2...

ViRGE wrote on May 25, 2011, 23:26:Pro-tip: If you want secure leaderboards, don't release it on the PC. Any platform that lets users execute arbitrary binaries will get broken at some point. We really don't need leaderboards; we're willing to accept the lack of that feature

Blizzard has never seemed to have a huge issue with that with Starcraft 1/2, Warcraft 3 and World of Warcraft Arena battles. They even have leader boards that involve money which is a much more ripe target to want to rig things.

Capcom is the company that put DRM on their PSN titles and then those games were made unplayable when PSN went down for a month. You would think that experience would teach them that DRM hurts paying customers, but instead here we are with them stepping their DRM UP.

Well as someone who ponied up for SFIV as soon as it came out, this completely turns me off. I'll just stick with SFIV, I'm not going to purchase this DRM'd mess.

Pro-tip: If you want secure leaderboards, don't release it on the PC. Any platform that lets users execute arbitrary binaries will get broken at some point. We really don't need leaderboards; we're willing to accept the lack of that feature

I'm more wondering, how much bandwidth does this type of DRM use? More and more ISP's are putting smaller and smaller bandwidth caps and if this DRM sends enough traffic around it could cause a good sized blip on someones cap. If DRM for legally bought games start becoming an issue with ISP caps then this is going to get really interesting when more and more people start noticing the effects and start really raising their voices over both parties (ISP's and DRM-lacing companies).

You got it Rigs. It's really frustrating, no one wants to build their own secure multiplayer components but then they want to complain about the less than wonderful reception their game receives. If you have a decent multiplayer game then you can build a community around it but you can't do that by trying to do the least amount of work possible.

I don't understand why these companies don't do something like Punkbuster or like Blizzard's Battle.net? Or maybe just join something like STEAM? Why GFWL? If they wanted to crucify the Windows release of this (admittedly awesome) game (I have the PS3 version and the original Windows version), they couldn't have made a better decision! 'Always-On' DRM for..A FIGHTING GAME?!? WTF? You end up in the menu's almost as much as in the matches themselves. Why, OH WHY, couldn't they just have had it for the multi side and not the singleplayer? That makes absolutely NO SENSE!

I'll admit that I was...WAS...looking forward to it's release, but not now. In fact, it might drive a lot of us TO crack it, which is EXACTLY what they DIDN'T want...go figure, eh?

=-Rigs-=

'Now we gave you a promise! And we are bound by that promise. And damn you for asking for it! And damn me for agreeing to it! And damn all of us to Hell because that is exactly where we're going!' -John Sheridan, 'And All My Dreams Torn Asunder', B5

I don't see what always-on DRM has to do with people using trainers to put themselves at the top of leaderboards. Without some sort of continually updated anti-cheat detection and the threat of having your CD-Key banned upon collection of enough evidence that you're a hacker it's still going to be a problem.